Users love Chrome but businesses tend to hate it. Just some of the reasons: A built-in silent updater, sub-par deployment tools, and business apps certified for Microsoft’s outdated IE6. With all of this working against Google, can Chrome ever make friends in the business world?

It’s a fact that Google’s Chrome has failed to woo business users thus far, despite several tricks that Google tried. For instance, the search giant released the source code of Google Update (code-named Omaha), Chrome’s underlying update engine, on an open-source basis three months ago, responding to heavy criticism from enterprise administrators who hate Chrome’s silent updating mechanism. Google has recently tweaked the engine again so it no longer runs continuously as a background process and instead uses the Windows Task Scheduler to only run at periodic intervals.

Most users never see update notification because of Chrome's silent updating feature that applies a new version even if the browser isn't running.

The problem with auto-updating

IT managers and network administrators have been opposing the Google Update platform that delivers updates to Chrome, Google Earth, and other client software from Google. In fact, many have singled out Chrome’s silent updating as the key reason for ditching the browser in a business environment.

The underlying platform automatically installs the latest update even if Chrome isn’t running. It’s a worry-free mechanism that keeps consumers up to date with the latest Chrome code and features, but it’s also a big no-no in corporations where a browser runs business-critical apps.

Unlike everyday users, corporations extensively test browser updates against their apps before a new browser version is approved for use. Google holds onto their own cunningly designed updater for a very good reason.

Forced updates: A way to grow a browser’s web usage share

The company has been leveraging silent updating to boost Chrome’s share of the web market. I’ve criticized this practice before, dubbing browser installers an emerging battlefield in the market share wars. With the exception of Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome, other browsers put a dialog up that kindly gives you a choice of installing the latest update. Apple has received fair share of criticism for pushing Safari to users via Apple Software Update, an updating tool that’s automatically installed as part of Apple’s Windows software like iTunes or QuickTime.

It updates Apple software on your system but it also fools users into installing Safari browser by slipping in Safari installation by inappropriately labeling it a software update. Apple tweaked the tool when faced with public criticism so it now singles out new software like Safari in a separate category labeled “new software.” Still, the distinction isn’t clear enough. As a result, many inexperienced users are still tricked into installing a fresh copy of the browser, although they did not have it previously installed on their systems. The practice enables Apple to artificially boost Safari market share numbers. To what extent – we don’t know.

Corporations still unimpressed with Chrome

Chrome never asks you if you want to install a new version. Instead, the browser leverages the Google Update process that’s sitting in your system as a background task to do this automatically, and silently, even if the browser isn’t running. While average consumers tend to forgive such policy, corporations shut the door to Chrome because a new browser version that gets automatically installed on client machines may render business apps certified for the previous version inoperable. Open-sourcing the Google Update engine was a step in the right direction but this didn’t accelerate Chrome’s adoption rate in enterprise – IT administrators clearly haven’t changed their mind.

What they require is a browser and an accompanying deployment tools that enable bulk installs with custom preferences and user policies. Google partially addressed these issues with Update Controls, new Chrome tools that give network administrators the ability to control the installation and updating of Google products via Google Update. Windows Group Policy is now used to apply updating policies to all or individual machines on a domain, while an Administrative Template file allows selection of policies using Group Policy Editor. Administrators can use the Group Policy support to prevent specific Google applications from installing or set the frequency of the update check. Administrators can also set “automatic”, “manual,” or “no update” rules per application.

Corporations to ditch IE for Firefox or Chrome

However, IT administrators are indifferent to both open-sourced Google Update and Update Controls, still citing the need for greater control over how Google’s products are deployed in the business environment. To make things worse, other browser vendors, especially Microsoft, all offer such tools. Even if Google delivered the right set of tools that system administrators require, Chrome would still face one big obstacle called IE6.

Despite Chrome’s speed advantage that especially comes into play in business apps optimized for Chrome’s V8 engine, the fact remains that most enterprises strictly certify business apps against IE6. That’s why this outdated IE version still accounts to over one quarter of all IE installations in use today.

That said, Google won’t stand a chance of gaining the foothold in the business world until corporations upgrade to Windows 7 and newer, more modern browsers. This will open the window of opportunity for Firefox and Chrome, the two browsers that may see greater adoption rate in enterprises. Of course, the scenario isn’t a given one: Updating the code of business apps for a non-Microsoft browser may cost more than certifying apps to run on IE8, meaning businesses may end up stuck with a Microsoft-branded browser after all.

According to a NetApplications‘ survey, Chrome’s overall web usage share throughout the second quarter of the year (April, May, and June) hit 1.74 percent. All Internet Explorer versions led the pack with 65.85 percent web usage share. Firefox and Safari followed with 22.39 percent and 8.46 percent, respectively.

Reader Comments

Peter Kasting

You make the claim “The company has been leveraging silent updating to boost Chrome’s share of the web market” and then cite no evidence at all, instead talking about Apple’s installer for Safari. Precisely how is a Google updater that silently updates an existing copy of Chrome “boost[ing] Chrome’s share” in a way that you find worthy of criticism?

I agree that auto updating is an important issue and that it should be able to be turned off, at least. Possibly through a policy editor.

You also forgot that Chrome has no way of deploying silently to users in a workgroup or domain environment. Network administrators have to resort to half-tweaked apps that are bulky and awkward to use. Most enterprise/business applications have options for automated silent installs.

Also, Chrome can circumvent administrative rights by installing directly into the user’s profile. This may piss off a few admin in itself, but again it makes it difficult for deployment. So to install Chrome on a computer that has multiple users, you have to install it for each one of those users. This is not a very efficient way to manage applications in an enterprise.

Based on these two issues, it seems Google never intended Chrome to be used in the enterprise. Perhaps they had hoped to win favor to the average user and then make it easier for administrators to manage later.